Thread Number: 74287
/ Tag: Vintage Automatic Washers
POD 01/02/2018 - Bendix Tumble Agitator front-load washer |
[Down to Last] |
|
Post# 980833 , Reply# 1   2/1/2018 at 08:30 (2,275 days old) by swestoyz (Cedar Falls, IA)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
1    
Yes, this is a 1957 WGG-C Gyromatic. I suspect that by the time Bendix dropped the bolt down B/S models they went away from calling out the Gyromatic specifically and went with the tumble action name.
These were some of the most expensive automatic washers one could buy in the mid-50's. The top loading variants Bendix was offering at the time were marketing to those households who wanted a semi or fully automatic without breaking the bank. Ben |
Post# 980889 , Reply# 3   2/1/2018 at 18:15 (2,274 days old) by Launderess (Quiet Please, There´s a Lady on Stage)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
2    
And marketing material, and they really did try to do a number on wringer/semi-automatic washing machines.
Here are a few, if anyone is interested in more let me know. |
Post# 980891 , Reply# 4   2/1/2018 at 18:19 (2,274 days old) by Launderess (Quiet Please, There´s a Lady on Stage)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
1    
Thing is had there been "HE" type detergents around back then it is likely Bendix and other cylinder washers would have taken off in USA.
This being as it may commercial laundries long had been using cylinder washers with soap, and getting good to excellent results. So wonder why or what was the problem in domestic use that gave so many problems. Hurley Machine Company famously had their Thor "cylinder" washer, but stopped production before WWII it seems to concentrate solely on top loading machines with a central beater, and or wringer washers. |
Post# 980906 , Reply# 6   2/1/2018 at 19:48 (2,274 days old) by norgeway (mocksville n c )   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
2    
A mid to late 50s Bendix for anything else ever made!I just wish I could find one, I would be using it, |
Post# 980939 , Reply# 7   2/2/2018 at 06:58 (2,274 days old) by Jetcone (Schenectady-Home of Calrods,Monitor Tops,Toroid Transformers)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
3    
Laundress love those sales brochures they show off my Utiltly Bendix beautifully! I had Brisnate all covered in suds when he used mine at Christmas. He;s an “automatic-buoy” for sure!!!!!
I have to say my 1956 Bendix is now one of my best cleaners in the stable. I think Tom is right the new detergents are what was needed for these machines. With the elimination of suds those clothes really get slapped around in the cylinder. |
Post# 981069 , Reply# 11   2/2/2018 at 23:13 (2,273 days old) by Launderess (Quiet Please, There´s a Lady on Stage)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
2    
Have tried versions from the 1960's, 1970's and 1980's, all create far too much froth for Miele washers' liking. Suppose one could get the dosage down to one tablespoon or whatever, but don't think that is going to clean eleven pounds of washing in front loader very well.
It isn't just the froth either; Tide powder like many other P&G detergents is very difficult to rinse. Again see this with the various versions have tried over years. In fact Tide is the one vintage detergent one never bothers collecting any longer. It just creates too much work for semi-automatic or front loading washers. Used some vintage Cheer powder in Hoover TT, and that was first and last time. The stuff required endless rinsing *and* dulled the finish of aluminum wash tub. Don't think P&G and or other makers of laundry detergents set out to wreck h-axis washers. For one thing other than Bendix and Westinghouse and a few others there weren't many makers of such machines, and for various reasons their market share was very low. Besides when we speak of detergent makers in post WWII era, there really was one dominate player; Proctor and Gamble. Then as now Tide was the market leader and as such if anyone wanted to "wreck" front loading automatics P&G could have done so, but they didn't. In fact they came up with Dash detergent with "controlled suds" for use in all automatic washing machines. post was last edited: 2/2/2018-23:35] |
Post# 981070 , Reply# 12   2/2/2018 at 23:14 (2,273 days old) by Launderess (Quiet Please, There´s a Lady on Stage)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
|
Post# 981187 , Reply# 17   2/4/2018 at 00:57 (2,272 days old) by Maytag85 (Sean A806)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
I do use HE detergent in my Maytag A810 washer and my Lady Kenmore portable washer and I will say that the rinse water in my Maytag A810 and my Lady Kenmore portable is more clear compared to if I use regular detergent. Regular detergent works well in both of my washers, but I use the Tandil detergent from Aldi since I shop there a lot. Is it me or do Whirlpool/Kenmore belt drive washers create a lot of suds? My Lady Kenmore portable washer creates a fair amount of suds no matter what detergent I use, and I only use a little bit of detergent.
|
Post# 981217 , Reply# 19   2/4/2018 at 10:06 (2,272 days old) by jamiel (Detroit, Michigan and Palm Springs, CA)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
2    
My grandfather worked right after the war for Monsanto and had done some work pre-war on the earliest detergents. The earliest detergents were un-built, sudsy and mild, sulfate based, like Dreft or Vel (think dishwashing liquid or shampoo), appropriate for hand washables but neutral pH and not really strong enough for anything else. Tide combined these with phosphate (much of their uniqueness was applied phosphorous chemistry) and alkaline builders and spray-drying and was quite revolutionary when compared to built soap powders (think Fels Naptha or Duz). All had a different surfactant (anionic or nonionic...I can never remember the difference) which didn't suds the same way--Monsanto's unique technology was around the surfactant (although they also had more experience with elemental phosphorous than P&G). As the Spectator notes, fighting against the 3 soap manufacturers (P&G/Lever/Colgate) was tough for Monsanto and they sold out in the mid 50s.
The mention of the brand management process at P&G is absolutely right---each of the brands fought against the sister brands just as hard as Lever Brothers or Colgate)--similar to the battles at the Big 3, or Coca-Cola/Pepsi, or any of the other companies using the Brand Manager structure. |
Post# 981283 , Reply# 22   2/4/2018 at 16:49 (2,271 days old) by Supersuds (Knoxville, Tenn.)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
3    
It's wrong to say consumers couldn't "access" low suds detergent in the period when Bendix and Westy frontloaders were sold. In addition to All, which was continuously available in several forms (including Fluffy All for those who wanted to use a full cup) and Dash, there were Salvo and Vim tablets which got a big marketing push, and Colgate had a whole series of "adjusted suds" or "controlled suds" products in the Sixties including Ad, Punch, and Burst. In fact, it was easy to get low suds detergents and the makers weren't shy about advertising their advantages. All of these brands were available in every supermarket in the U.S.
There were also detergents such as Lever's Drive which were not advertised as low sudsing, but still don't produce the froth of Tide, Cheer, or Oxydol. As a collector I've had the pleasure of using most of these products recently, and they perform as advertised. I used Salvo today to wash some sheets and there was no layer of suds to be seen, using two tablets as recommended on the box. By and large, however, the old high-suds detergents did clean better, and I believe that's why housewives used them, not because of a nefarious conspiracy. The low suds products underperformed in the marketplace largely on merit, not advertising. It isn't that difficult to tell if a detergent is working well or not. And I have to say I've never observed any problems personally using high suds detergents in top- loading DD Whirlpools. I don't doubt they could cause problems with some washers, but I think it was a non-issue for a lot of people. |
Post# 981366 , Reply# 23   2/5/2018 at 11:38 (2,271 days old) by Jetcone (Schenectady-Home of Calrods,Monitor Tops,Toroid Transformers)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
1    
All interesting points.
I love the old commercials! We tried Tide once in the 60's in our '56 GE FF, if you can believe it , it sudslocked!!!! Never used it again!
anionics are good for dirt removal non-ionics attack and lift grease and oils Esp body oils which is 90% of the grime on clothes. cationics are for fabric softening and used in rinse formulas
I remember reading about Corporate espionage in the 1950's at FORD, the EDSEL division was sabotaged by the Mercury division so sales of Edsel would fall and Mercury would succeed and it did. It was a crazy predatory corporate structure.
Does anybody know the inventor company of ALL in Ohio, I'd love to do some digging on that? This post was last edited 02/05/2018 at 13:27 |
Post# 981390 , Reply# 25   2/5/2018 at 14:09 (2,271 days old) by speedqueen (Metro-Detroit)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
you cannot forget the Chrysler "Forward Look" cars that precipitated the look of the 1959 GM models. While I like them, the '58 GM cars are often described as looking as though they were sinking under the weight of their own styling. Chrysler challenged them to lean things out and make them more sharp and angular.
Here is a '58 Oldsmobile 98 and a '58 Chrysler Saratoga. |